What, did they refuse to pay the charity defrauding, child raping, insurrection committing convicted felon in chief a big enough cut of the profits? Or just accidentally hit one of his cronies? Owner better hope he hid enough away to purchase a pardon... they're surprisingly affordable though. You'd think a president selling out his country would charge more than a few million for a pardon... alas i guess he really needs the gallons of spray tan.

The CDC is no longer a reputable source thanks to the germ-theory and vaccine denier currently impersonating a public health official. Another job well done destroying America's leadership, conservatives.

Welp, toss it on the giant heap of other laws the fascist party is breaking and will never face consequences for.

Video could come out of Trump raping toddlers, he could respond by saying 'yes that's real they wanted it and were lucky to get it', and not only would he never go to prison, he wouldn't lose any support. Thinking otherwise after everything that's happened in the last 10 years is just deluding yourself.

If that's the standard when does Trump get deposed?

Conservatives believing in morals and ethics, I needed a good laugh this morning. Go back to defending the pedophile you worship.

Don't worry, liberals will fight for you to have affordable access to antipsychotic meds too.

Another place right wingers bitch and scream like toddlers is biased against them and silencing their views is actually tilted in their favor, but anything short of blatant extremist propaganda and hate speech entirely divorced from reality simply isn't "fair".

50 years is extreme bullshit. Copyright was originally 14y with one renewal, in a time where instant global communication didn't exist and literacy was limited. Where there was no mass production. It's insane to claim it's ridiculous to suggest anything less than almost twice that.
You clearly think the purpose of copyright is for you to get to rent seek your creation for your entire life, but that's not the purpose.
Oh and did you forget where you are or is the copyrighted code most people here write inferior to whatever the fuck you make?

I get the stupid stuff and posted a funny example... but.. Emojis are just Unicode code points. If you're going to allow Unicode, should you arbitrarily disallow certain ranges/glyphs because they're in a list of those assigned to emojis? What if more are added... should the compiler download lists? Or should code always have to be the Latin alphabet and symbols on keyboard? I'd say allowing Unicode is fine and it's up to developers not to be jackasses with it.

Behold the horror!
https://i.imgur.com/D0Uonre.jp...

Thanks to the Monaco editor (also used by VSCode) and twinBASIC, a language in development backwards compatible with VB6... that can also be used to write kernel mode drivers... I'll add some to my next driver project, see how many aneurysms I can cause with emoji-filled BASIC running in km. Abomination!

"Extreme far left"... where "far left" is anything short of the outright fascism of the US right and extreme far left is the rest of the world's moderate. Fuck off. Don't need to lie about right wing extremism to make the point there's a bunch of rich hypocrites in Hollywood.

So in other words, it's either having to vet every post before it goes up lest they become liable for something, or allow an endless flood of spam, porn, slurs, etc? Your plan is fucking moronic.

1) You seem to think nothing can be fucked up as long as it's still better than others. That's ridiculous.
2) Even accepting a major breaking change was necessary, it was absolutely not necessary to limit functionality -- again not being worse than Google doesn't mean they didn't fuck something up.
3) Defaults matter and the time, money, and effort spent on those was clearly detrimental to the core browser.
4) But constantly shrinking the margin by which they're better has cratered their market share and created a real danger of ceasing to exist as a meaningful alternative at all.

Good luck trying to "no stupid user, shut up and accept that our choices are better and we know better than you about what you need in a browser, plus Chrome bad!" Firefox back to the top. You angling for a job at Mozilla?

I have the feature to block malicious downloads turned off so it doesn't go sending "Metadata" off. Yesterday I had a download nonetheless blocked, in a unmistakably false positive. After confirming it was still indeed turned off in the Settings UI a search turned up that apparently that's ignored and to really turn it off you need to change some about:config setting. This kind of underhanded misleading crap is what you expect from Chrome, but nope, it was Firefox. Obviously Chrome is still much worse but it's really infuriating when the browser that markets itself as respecting privacy ignores a privacy setting.